It's
estimated that, in 1776, there were 2.5 million people living in the 13
American colonies.

That's
13 colonial governments for 2.5 million people.

Now,
we have one city government serving 8.4 million people in New York City.

We have
one city government serving 3.8 million people in Los Angeles.

Yes,
these cities have smaller districts or boroughs with their own governments,
but you get the idea. Greater and greater numbers of people with less
and less real contact with their government.

We have
one federal government that serves 300 million people.

I doubt
that Jefferson or Madison truly envisioned the extent of the population
explosion. Their plan for central government supposed that elected representatives
would be closer to the people.

So how
can this happen now?

Answer:
Local and state governments should exercise much greater power than the
federal government. And by power, I don't mean invasive force; I mean
decision-making.

You
can't hope for a Republic when 300 million people fall under the sway
of a single central government. It's sheer madness.

One
more reason for 10th Amendment nullification. Which is to say, state governments
asserting, in no uncertain terms, that they refuse to honor federal laws
which exceed the enumerated federal powers explicitly granted in the Constitution.

Likewise,
local (city and town) governments should carefully inspect their state
constitutions and find the many areas where state authorities have overstepped
granted powers. More nullification is in order.

Here
is the basic principle: Give as much decision-making power as possible
to smaller government entities, and strip away as much power as possible
from larger government entities.

Of course,
this idea cuts directly across the grain of governments as ATM machines
with no credit limits. This cuts off, at the knees, the idea of governments
as giveaway game shows. This stops governments as big mommy and big daddy
who hold the nation's purse strings. Smaller governments mean pay as you
go. They mean spend less than you have. Why? Because smaller governments
can't borrow endlessly—who will issue them loans when these governments
are drastically reducing taxes, as they surely would when citizens are
gaining more control of the means of governing? Taxes, you see, are the
collateral that lenders use to assure themselves that debts can somehow,
someday be repaid.

Let's
imagine a few examples of what might happen in a new and more responsive
system—a system that is much closer to the spirit of the Republic.

Suppose
we have a small city, Boffo, which has a population of 40,000 people.
The crime rate is egregious and intolerable. Town halls are held. People
speak out. It becomes apparent that citizens don't want to allow violent
crimes and property crimes to continue. So a bill is introduced. Penalties
for violent assaults with weapons, short of murder, will carry a sentence
of 40 years. No time off for good behavior. An area of land on the outskirts
will be set aside for a prison farm. The prison will be a tented and fenced
area where convicts live outside. This is necessary because the city can't
afford to build modern structures.

A week
after the passage of this law, a few men are arrested for shooting and
wounding two people walking their dog. In the local court, they are found
guilty. Forty years.

Advertisement

This
sets the tone.

The
next day, a significant number of chronic felons move out of Boffo City.

Peace
begins to reign.

Neighboring
cities begin to follow suit.

One
city, Micro, decides it doesn't like this pattern, so it concocts a special
program to rehabilitate violent offenders and gives them short jail terms.
Fine. That is the will of Micro. They pass their own law and they take
the consequences, whatever they may be.

Another
town, Juris, decides that all drugs should be legal. Anyone can buy and
sell any drugs they want to. They think this will decriminalize their
population and bring harmony. Are they right? Who knows? It's their own
business.

Another
town, Napoleon, appoints a mayor for life with far-reaching law enforcement
power.

Another
town introduces extensive moral instruction in its schools.

Another
town sanctions the right to polygamy.

Another
town hires a security corporation to make its streets safe.

Another
town bans all weapons.

Another
town insists that every adult must own a gun and undergo training on how
to use it.

Another
town believes that encouraging every citizen to be an artist will bring
peace and tranquility, and it erects boldly imaginative structures never
before seen, and advertises itself as a prime tourist destination.

Another
town focuses on innovative agriculture, and exports its produce with the
intent of making all its citizens prosperous landholders.

Fill
in more of the picture yourself...

The
point is, the people, the citizens are closer to their own governments—and
therefore they are actually participating in key decisions.

To the
average person, such a diverse system seems insane—but that is because
the average person has been brainwashed into believing that one size fits
all, and wants it that way. Wants uniformity. Wants a central authority
with vast power. Has no taste for imagination. Can't envision new possibilities.

But
people can change, especially when they see innovations popping up all
around them.

When
people ask me to talk about mind control, this is what I eventually get
to. Mind control is all about accepting the status quo of centralized
power and accepting the uniform landscape it brings. Getting used to that
landscape IS mind control. It's considered normal. It's non-participatory.
It's non-inventive.

On the
other hand, nullification of excess government power opens the door to
decentralization, and decentralization allows groups of citizens to invent
their own reality.

If you
like the basic reality of the town you're in, you stay and you pitch in.
If you don't like it, you go somewhere else and find/create a different
reality.

This
IS what happens when limited central government is truly limited.

Most
people don't grasp that.

The
last thing they understand is the implication of decentralization:

Thousands
and thousands and thousands of cities, towns, and villages deciding, imagining,
and creating the shapes of societies they desire.

Subscribe
to the NewsWithViews Daily News Alerts!

Enter
Your E-Mail Address:

Think
about it. Think about the implications of truly decentralized government,
in which citizens invent their own destiny. I believe a good and reasonable
debate about the far-reaching consequences of limited central government
is a worthwhile and necessary undertaking. I think we have all been hoodwinked
into imagining that the restoration of constitutional law would alter
our present reality in only modest ways. I think the original vision carried
far more radical outcomes than most of us are willing to consider. I think
the entire meaning of the revolution of 1776 was watered down, and much
of it was buried. And finally, I think the truth is revealed when we consider
one simple question: what does powerful citizen-participation in local
government actually entail?

When
we open that door, are we saying we are only opening it a little bit,
under heavy security and with fear as our guide, or are we giving the
pursuit of liberty and happiness its full due?

Jon
Rappoport has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years. Nominated
for a Pulitzer Prize early in his career, Jon has published articles on
medical fraud, politics, alternative health, and sports in LA Weekly,
CBS Healthwatch, Spin, Stern, and other magazines and newspapers in the
US and Europe.

He
is the is author of several books, including The Secret Behind Secret
Societies and The Magic Agent (a novel).

Jon
is the author of a new course for home schoolers, LOGIC AND ANALYSIS.